An M3 is very different from a supercar, but its engine does emulate a supercar's engine. The Ferrari F430 was the benchmark, times are changing and now the benchmark is the McLaren MP4-12C. As the M3 E92 has a similar engine as the Ferrari, so the M3 F32 should have a similar engine as the McLaren. Cost? The S65 was developped from scratch only for the M3 E9X. Don't tell me it was cheap. This engine will surely cost less, if that is an issue.

certainly not impossible, but the S65 wasn't developed from scratch, as it shares many elements, including the basic block design with the M5/M6's S85. However, and I haven't researched the numbers, what will limit the F32's engine's characteristics will be the basics of the N55 block or whatever engine block BMW plans to use for it.

Factors such as maximum bore and stroke will factor into piston speed and that will play into limiting the max redline, but I do feel that the M division has had their say and will ensure a relatively high reving engine, despite the TT. As to what technology they will use to achieve that, I am curious to see. The 1M already revs relatively high for a "common" TT engine, so there's is hope yet.

S65/S85, basically the same engine were completely new developments, and AMG's answer was the NA 6.2l V8. The 1M revs as high as any 135i, 335i, X6 xDrive35i, so it is not special. Anyway we'll know more, it seems the M3 F32 engine is sitting in the Vision Connected Drive.

S65/S85, basically the same engine were completely new developments, and AMG's answer was the NA 6.2l V8. .

Your statement of the S65 being developed only for the E9X, implied that the development costs were only amortized over the E9X. It wasn't, as it was amortized, along with the overall cost of the S85, over the M3/M5/M6 range.

The F32 M3's engine still could be a V6TT. It's not ruled out yet as far as I know. BMW will have to do something to set it apart from the non-Ms.

Going V6 is not what they need to do to set it apart from non M's. All previous M3 engines until the S65 were based on series production engines that were modified by M. Why all of a sudden do they have to make the M cars engines different.

My favorite part of this engine is the high redline. It's so satisfying. I have convinced myself to believe that BMW is dedicated to developing a turbo engine without giving up the 8k redline. I really hope so.

Going V6 is not what they need to do to set it apart from non M's. All previous M3 engines until the S65 were based on series production engines that were modified by M. Why all of a sudden do they have to make the M cars engines different.

Didn't matter what they were based on, the S engines are significantly different. I'd rather see a V6 anyway just for the compactness.

Per unit cost is a problem for BMW. Ferrari and McLaren have the luxury of selling their cars at huge prices while BMW cannot really do that so they cannot really spend too much money on too exotic designs.

Didn't matter what they were based on, the S engines are significantly different. I'd rather see a V6 anyway just for the compactness.

Actually it does matter..... the blocks were exactly the same..... the crankshaft, rods, pistons and cylinder heads were different. The block is the basis for an engine, it has to be strong enough to handle the BMEP's that are produced by the combustion events.

Changing crankshafts, rods, pistons, and heads can totally change the characteristics and dynamics of an engine. I don't care if BMW bases the new FI M3 engine on the N54 or N55, all I care is that it is a satisfying powerplant with a high redline (7.5K RPM or higher), good power delivery, and a satisfying sound.

Anyone who wishes BMW would make a V6 is out of touch with the virtues of the inline 6 design and with BMW's heritage. BMW has said on many occasions in the past it would not make 6 cylinder engines in any other configuration other than inline. I was quite surprised and repulsed to hear that a V6 was possible in the new F32 M3. Thankfully it seems that that rumour is mostly squashed.

They also said they would never go turbo.
They also said there would never be an SUV M car.
They also said that they would never use the same engine in an M car as a regular 3 series.

Your point is?

What is your point? I agree with you on the M SUV's but BMW has not said they would never do turbos, in fact they used turbos on the 2002 Turbo back in 1973. They have said they preferred the high revving NA engines to FI in the M cars but I guess some things have to change. BMW has been using the same engines in the M cars as the regular 3 series cars for every M3 until the E90/92/93. This was the first version where the M3 had a totally different engine from the regular 3 series cars.

The E30 M3 engine (S14) was a development of the M10 4 cylinder with a S38/M88 cylinder head. The M10 was a series production engine from 1960 to 1987 in many different BMW cars

The E36 M3 engines (S50 & S52) were developments of the M50 & M52 inline sixes from the E30 and E36 3 series cars.

The E46 M3 engine (S54) was a development of the M54 inline six from the E46 3 Series cars.

The E90/92/93 M3 engine was the only M3 specific engine to date. It was a development of the S85 M5/M6 engine which was one of a very few a ground up engine designs for the M division. The S65 has not yet and most likely will not be used in any other BMW car after the E90/92/93 M3.

Anyone who wishes BMW would make a V6 is out of touch with the virtues of the inline 6 design and with BMW's heritage.

Being a little dramatic aren't we? BMW has been dumping their heritage left and right these days. That applies even more so to M cars. As a company BMW is a far cry from their past. Aside from the badge and shape of the rear side windows, it's difficult to see any lineage in the first BMW I ever owned, a 1976 2002, and today. Nonetheless a 90 degree V configuration is a more efficient configuration for power, and the compactness makes it easier to place in the chassis for optimal handling. I don't care what they do as long as they do it well. Personally I'd prefer a screaming NA 4-banger in an ultra-light compact chassis but since BMW doesn't care about their lineage then why should I?

Being a little dramatic aren't we? BMW has been dumping their heritage left and right these days. That applies even more so to M cars. As a company BMW is a far cry from their past. Aside from the badge and shape of the rear side windows, it's difficult to see any lineage in the first BMW I ever owned, a 1976 2002, and today. Nonetheless a 90 degree V configuration is a more efficient configuration for power, and the compactness makes it easier to place in the chassis for optimal handling. I don't care what they do as long as they do it well. Personally I'd prefer a screaming NA 4-banger in an ultra-light compact chassis but since BMW doesn't care about their lineage then why should I?

I agree with you on the fact that they are getting away from their lineage in many ways, but I am personally not a fan of V6 engines in general. They are a compromised design that have poor natural balancing and require balance shafts to make them properly smooth. They are indeed better from a compactness/packaging standpoint since they are almost half the length, but in my opinion that is where the benefits end.

I see you own a 911 Porsche is a company that knows how to preserve their lineage. At least a Porsche 911 still looks like a Porsche 911 and still has a Flat-6 mounted in the back like it has always been. I will own a 991 GT3 sometime down the road...... and I may or may not have an F30/32 M3 parked along side it in the garage, that depends on how well they do with the FI 6 cylinder engine for the next M

An M3 is very different from a supercar, but its engine does emulate a supercar's engine. The Ferrari F430 was the benchmark, times are changing and now the benchmark is the McLaren MP4-12C. As the M3 E92 has a similar engine as the Ferrari, so the M3 F32 should have a similar engine as the McLaren. Cost? The S65 was developped from scratch only for the M3 E9X. Don't tell me it was cheap. This engine will surely cost less, if that is an issue.

The F32 M3's engine still could be a V6TT. It's not ruled out yet as far as I know. BMW will have to do something to set it apart from the non-Ms.

There are a variety of reasons why this is next to impossible.

1. Heritage, experience (been discussed above)
2. BMWs belief in a mechanically balanced engine. I6 is naturally 1st and 2nd order balanced. V6 needs a significant supplementary mechanical balancing system in the engine itself. Certainly that does not mean a V6 can't be a great engine...
3. Two major corporate wide programs at BMW, "Material Cost Offensive" and
"BMW Group Modular Strategy". NOT having a special one-off engine for either the M3 or the M5 dove tails right in with these strategies.

They also said they would never go turbo.
They also said there would never be an SUV M car.
They also said that they would never use the same engine in an M car as a regular 3 series.

Your point is?

you took the words right out of my mouth! nothing shocks me any more.

and if they base the new m3 engine on the n55 or n54 or w/e (ie going back to what they did before the s65), then imtho, they should lower the price of the f3x m3. afterall, those savings should be passed down to the remaining loyal ///m enthusiasts. its the least they could do after throwing the handbook out the window.